User talk:Hesperian

Contents

Thanks for fixing this. Pardon the poor naming, I don't think I was aware it was volume two when I got it. I found volume 1 from the new scan you linked, so I'm uploading that too. cygnis insignis 17:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't even notice! I think I'll reupload Volume 2 under a matching name, and delete it under the current name. Better to do it while there are only a dozen or so Page: pages to move. Hesperian 23:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Discussion regarding the Categories "Fossil xxx" is occurring on Wp:ToL (here). As a member of the project you input is requested in to gain a larger view of the communities opinion on how to handle the points raised. Thanks --Kevmin (talk) 18:26, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Definitely works better on the page. When you say "viewing flipbook" do you mean at the site or a 'flippy'? I couldn't duplicate your method, but I'll persist if clarify where I should be looking. cygnis insignis 04:58, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Navigate to required page (probably best to click on single-page view first)

If the zoom is not 100%, click the "+" button until it is.

Right click on the page (or, alternatively, do whatever it is you Mac-users do to bring up the context menu)

Choose "Save image as..."; or "view image" then File|Save.

The image you get from this method is a jpg, which isn't ideal, since the format is lossy, and you don't even have control over the fidelity of the image that they serve you. If you want to be obsessive about image quality, the ideal solution is to click instead on "HTTP", then download jp2.zip file (typically hundreds of Mb), unzip it, identify the required jp2 file, convert it to png, then upload that.

I should have tried an alternate browser: my FF was the issue, Safari was fine. Is the file type an issue; should I have converted to png or renamed the file? cygnis insignis 16:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Best to convert to PNG, I think. The PNG file will still have JPG artefacts in it, but at least it will be theoretically possible to upload a better version over the top. Hesperian 23:11, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering if you could somehow rollback the uploaded changes I made to File:Triphyophyllum distribution.svg. That'll teach me to play around with something I don't understand. All I wanted to do was remove Guinea from the distribution and crop it a bit more to include just Africa but failed. Much appreciated. --Rkitko (talk) 02:25, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for donating images to the Wikimedia Commons. You have uploaded some images in the past with the license {{PD}}. While this was a license acceptable in the early days of Wikimedia, since January 2006, this license has been deprecated and since October 2008 no new uploads with this license was allowed.

The license on older images should be replaced with a better and more specific license/permissions and you can help by checking the images and adding {{PD-self}} if you are the author or one of the other templates that you can see in the template on the image page.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Hello, Sorry for spaming your talk page, but this is very important. On the behalf of the Wikiproject medicine at the en.wikipedia, I am inviting you to be a part of the discussion going on the project's talk page about Patient images, The discussion started after I obtained a permission to more than 23000 dermatology related images, and about 1500 radiology images. As some editors of the Wikiproject medicine have some concerns regarding the policy of using patient images on wikipedia, and regarding patient consents. Also they believe that common's policy is not so clear regarding the issue. And since you are the experts please join us at this very important discussion -- MaenK.A.Talk 14:22, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I would have just gone by the flickr identification. Someone long ago changed the image info to say it is Schefflera elegantissima. It's just the file name that is wrong. Hesperian 07:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Dear Hesperian. I am writing to you to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Aug-Sep 2011 within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

Hi Hesperian! I'm working with User:Jean-Frédéric to link Biodiversity Heritage Library (BHL) images with their corresponding pages on the BHL website. I think that'd be a great way to build a closer relationship between BHL and the Commons, leading to more and better scientific illustrations for the Wikipedias and other Wikimedia projects. As somebody who's uploaded a lot of BHL images to the Commons, I'd love your feedback on how we're doing, and your help in making this project awesome. We've started by tagging a handful of images with a first shot at a template page. Let me know what you think! -- cheers, Gaurav (talk) 01:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Dear Hesperian. I am writing to you to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of your inactivity in the past six months.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at the current inactivity run page within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six
months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

Just as well I didnt try a meetup this month crap has been hasppening (nothing more boring than satusuro complainin g about life) - looks like aughust is an annual event for you :) - here anyways. must have a meetup sometime when things settle down... SatuSuro (talk) 00:44, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I deleted the file you wanted deleted, only to discover that the undeleted one was a redirect to the deleted one. I tried to sort that out but must have messed something up. I think it is fixed now? Hesperian 02:43, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

This frivolous nomination has been closed, image meets all Commons Policies, nominator has been advise that if they dispute the identification then they should discuss rather than request an image that meets all of Commons Policies be deleted. Gnangarra 13:20, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

A few months ago, a user uploaded hundreds of poorly categorized files of Boston (which I have been cleaning up), and paid so little attention that they uploaded some of the files two or even three times. Another user performed minor crops to straighten images, remove frames, and remove small watermarks. These crops were well done; they are logical and make the images usable for article use. Any information lost is well preserved in the image history. Hence, I have been nominating the duplicate files for deletion; even if they are not now pixel-for-pixel identical, to make them useful would result in cropping them exactly as the originals have been cropped, thus creating an exact duplicate.

I can certainly imagine some purposes for which we might wish we had retained the original. I could not imagine the City of Boston Archives themselves cropping the physical original!

My understanding of deletion is that the community decides, the administrators merely enact. By rights every single proposed deletion should be debated by the community. But that is insane, it would waste the community's time. Instead the community has defined some narrow areas where administrators may delete files on sight. But in any doubtful circumstance, we should still go back to the community to check what it wants. Therefore I think the proper thing to do is to discuss the file at Commons:Deletion requests. Sorry, I don't mean to waste your time, but I really think we do not know for sure what the community's opinion on this would be.

I have been, for lack of a better word, enjoying some of your 2010 uploads and I have a few questions.

First and most important, did you use upload software which is not the usual wiki-gui based upload methods? If so, could you share it?

Second, I was looking at a djvu file you uploaded and there was a complaint about it being based on jp2 and therefore useless for w source. I just made a djvu file which I am remaking because I used "eng" for the ocr language setting and it is clearly latin. That file used pbm and ppm files and I started to wonder if this file might also be useless for wiki-source.

More compliments about your 2010 uploads, it is really wonderful to find perfectly good pngs amongst the flickr/jpeg litter here. Thank you so much! -- RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:50, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

I'm writing you as one of the most active Commons users right now. Since a while now, the idea of a dedicated Commons conference has been floating around. But since the last Wikimania concrete steps have been taken to actually make it happen next year.
If you're interested in participation or maybe willing to help organize the first ever Commons Conference, I invite you to check out the project page and leave your comments; or just show your support for the idea, by signing up.

I just noticed a fabulous image at Kino, exactly what I needed to illustrate the flow. I went to thank Gn., but see it is one of yours, another talent I want to see more of. Kudos, — cygnis insignis 07:07, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I heard Robt Powell give a talk on Yate when he was recently in the country, I'll pass on a couple of things that were discussed. He demonstrated the virtues of black and white photography in showing trees and landscape, bringing attention to form and away from any noise that colour produces. One grand old specimen was at the edge of a canola field, the field of flowers was included in his image because he was taught to not tilt the camera (which distorts the subject). The original image was garish blobs of blue, green and yellow, but once converted to B&W it showed the Yate's graceful and mallee-like form. His stuff is online if you want some inspiration. Regards, cygnis insignis 00:52, 14 September 2018 (UTC)